In times of such peril — especially in the immediate wake of such traumatic events — I believe that it is of the utmost importance to take a step back and assess what it really is that we need to take measures to prevent.

The American cowboy is an example of how our country’s violence has been glorified and commercialized. (Photo: Leena Saarinen /Flickr Creative Commons)

Firstly, we need to address the history of violence in our country. Since its conception, America has struggled with perhaps the most vicious occurrences in a developed country. Though played up by redundant “wild west” films, we cannot hide from the black marks that plague our past. That said, the byproduct of living in one of the most free and independent societies to ever exist can sometimes be ugly.

However, when it comes to mass shootings, I don’t believe that it is solely the access to a weapon that enables the perpetrator. Reality shows us that the sadistic and malevolent people who carry out these horrific acts will find the means regardless. Ergo, the first step in hindering future mass shootings starts on a societal level. The most prime environment for somebody who wants to perform a mass shooting is one where the general public is ignorant and naïve. In almost all mass shootings, the culprit shows obvious signs of intent prior to the crime itself. Together, we must become vocal and vigilant in our attempts to recognize and make known red flags raised by individuals.

In San Bernadino, California, Sutherland Springs, Texas, and Sandy Hook, Connecticut, each of the shooters displayed their detachment from society. In the case of Parkland, Florida, the shooter gave unequivocal signs that he planned to commit some act of terror, even leaving a comment on a Youtube post that he would be a “professional school shooter.” As a country, it is imperative that we become more alert. It takes awareness and courage to report somebody who may be a threat, but we must make a habit of it if we are to counteract this growing trend. Families, neighbors and friends should be obliged to speak up when warning signs appear.

Commonly, after such tragic events, masses of people will call out for gun control.

The St. Paul’s student body practices a “total evacuation drill” on Aug. 24, 2017, as one of its many drills during Safety Week. Another Safety Week drill included protocol for an active shooter on campus. Stoneman Douglas also regularly practiced “active shooter” safety drills, but the protocol was thwarted when the shooter set off the fire alarm. (Photo: Daniel Wieseneck)

With that being said, gun control is a measure that will only lead to more measures. What I mean by that is that when the federal government does pass legislation that inhibits the sale of firearms, there will inevitably be another mass shooting. Consequently, people will cry out again for gun control, and the government will again pass more stringent legislation concerning the sale of firearms. It is an option that sweeps our legs out from under us, and we are already standing on the peak of a slippery slope.

Per contra, what could be considered is the issuance of gun-violence restraining orders, or GVROs. What these do is empower the family members, or those living with somebody who shows concrete signs of intent to carry out an act of gun violence, to argue before a court and temporarily revoke that person’s ability to buy a gun. But let me be clear, legislation like this would need to be drafted and passed very carefully. The implementation of a proper GVRO would in no way infringe on the second amendment rights of responsible gun owners across America, but would warrant those closest to a possible mass shooter to take steps towards blockading their objective.

Additionally, news outlets could do their part in reducing the publicity of the shooters. In observance of numerous rape shield laws, most news outlets refrain from identifying the victim testifying. Why not apply that discretion to the slaughterers who breach our schools and murder our youth? It has been proven time and time again that criminals bask in the attention that they gain, so why not reject them that pleasure? Keep the cameras aimed at those affected, and away from those who kill.

It is times like these that truly test the power of our constitution. Hundreds of years ago, the framers took precautionary measures to keep our government from being the victim of sudden passions, and we mustn’t trample on their will. Though it is hard to cope with such heinous circumstances, we cannot embolden the government to erase the liberties we rightfully posses as Americans.

Share this:

Like this:

About Luc Hebert

Luc Hebert is the Editor-in-Chief of The Paper Wolf. He also serves as Treasurer of the student council, and is active in Youth and Government. He is also an entrepreneur, having co-founded a local ATM company, V&H Gulfcoast. That said, you can still find him flipping burgers at Five Guys Burgers and Fries on week nights. If you have any questions, comments, info, or tips for Luc, please email Luc.hebert.2018@stpauls.com
View all posts by Luc Hebert →

Archives

One Comment on “What Can We Do about the Mass Shooting Epidemic?”

It’s is important to understand as you stated the possibility of rights and freedoms being eliminated. Can our government handle these negotiations without being influenced by lobbyists and companies seeking their own gains…the entire situation is difficult and delicate.
Thank you for this article, is was written well and an excellent example of presenting both sides of the argument